November's SAGE ADVICE Is Here!

November's Sage Advice column by WotC's Jeremy Crawford is up. This month deals with lightfoot halfing and wood elf hiding racial traits, some class features, backgrounds (you can have only one!), muticlassing, surprise rounds in combat, and more. Check out this month's Sage Advice here. The advice here has been added to the Sage Advice Compendium.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It's not 3 checks, it is 1 check, initiative.

The primary ability is to gain advantage when you win initiative. The auto-crit is not the main ability. It is something extra that they got because it wouldn't be fun to win initiative when surprising a foe and getting nothing out of it when you get something when you win initiative regularly.

The main part of the assassinate ability is to gain advantage on your attack when you win initiative.

I'm interested how the surprise auto-crit is not a main ability. How do you come to this conclusion? It's in the same paragraph as the advantage on initiative ability, and it's under the heading 'assassinate' for a sub-class called 'assassin.' I follow your argument on initiative and surprise (don't agree, but I easily follow) and that makes sense, but I have zero idea where you're coming from in labelling the auto-crit as a sub-tier ability and relatively unimportant. Having read the rules just now, I'm really struggling to come up with any way you can make that argument that isn't entirely subject and, like, just your opinion, man (h/t the Dude). It's certainly not labeled 'this is the main part of the ability and this is the not main part of the ability.'

And it is three checks. It's whatever opposed check is needed to establish surprise (generally stealth, but deception, perform, whatever could apply), then it's the initiative check, then it's the attack role. It's gated behind three checks, which could use different abilities (CHA to deceive, DEX for initiative, and STR for attack roll). Granted, if you ignore initiative, it's still gated behind two checks, but I find that more tolerable, especially since one of them isn't quite as arbitrary and narrative impacting as initiative.

I think you have a strong argument re: initiative and surprise. Stick to that. Don't ignore rolls or invent a ranking for the two abilities in assassinate. You're not on strong ground there.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Well first, I didn't advocate or tell anyone to use my houserule. I explained the houserule I use to solve problems that our group perceived with the way the rules are currently working. Previous to the clarification from JC about when surprise ended, we also had a houserule about when surprise ended which lo and behold is the exact way JC said it should work. So kudos to us for understanding how things should work I suppose. Player buy in for houserules shouldn't be a surprising factor, I would expect most DM's to run houserules by the players before implementing them. That's just good DM'ing after all. And your previous example was a completely different problem because you presented a player who would immediately attack an NPC quest giver for no reason other than "I want to". That in of itself is a whole separate issue to the one we're discussing now. I hope you can see that.

My houserule specifically allows 1 attack outside of initiative if that is what triggers combat. The triggering attack is resolved, which then starts combat. Maybe you misunderstood that or I wasn't clear on that point. Second, the attack in the first round may or may not be against a surprised creature. Don't forget that winning initiative especially in encounters with multiple creatures is not a foregone conclusion. You don't just win initiative whenever you want after all. But yes, if the person who triggered combat also gets a high initiative they could potentially attack again. and third it is possible that the target gets to act again before the target gets a full turn, note though that what this really means is 1 (one) single attack more than what would have normally happened by the rules without my houserule. All I did was make sure that things were fluid during the start of the encounter. And it could also be that the triggering event ISN'T an attack but something else.

I'm sorry that you think that granting a single (1, one) attack somehow destroys the action economy of the entire game (zomg!) but since I've actually used the houserule in practice and since it's a houserule that I've used for a long time with multiple groups (I run games both in person and online) I really think that you both simply don't know what you're talking about.

Hopefully this explanation helps? But if it doesn't, it's ok! This is my houserule, you don't have to use it kiddo.

Yeah, you presented it as a solution, that's advocating.

The one attack outside of initiative does allow 3 attacks prior to the target going. That's not good, and not necessary. It also does encourage rushing to be the one that starts combat because it offers a distinct advantage. I find it to be a bad houserule. If you like it, great! Have fun. But trivializing that it does these things and that other people find that to be a bad outcome isn't going to win points, especially with the smug tone you present with. And, since it's only polite, I, as the notional pot, acknowledge my black color as well.

 

[Noctem]

Yeah, you presented it as a solution, that's advocating.

The one attack outside of initiative does allow 3 attacks prior to the target going. That's not good, and not necessary. It also does encourage rushing to be the one that starts combat because it offers a distinct advantage. I find it to be a bad houserule. If you like it, great! Have fun. But trivializing that it does these things and that other people find that to be a bad outcome isn't going to win points, especially with the smug tone you present with. And, since it's only polite, I, as the notional pot, acknowledge my black color as well.

I presented the solution that my group and I have decided to use. I have no stake in what solution if any other people or groups use. I honestly don't care lol. This a very funny discussion tbh because of how much knee jerking there is going on and how many assumptions are being made without a single question being asked.

Well I wish you could play at my table for a few sessions and see if the fears you're expressing are legitimate or not. For now though, they seem to be constrained by your complete lack of experience with using it

gl hf

 

[Ristamar]

If you are making your players make perception checks to identify that they are being shot with arrows then you a lot more problems in your game than I realized.

Never said that I did. But if a target is unaware of an incoming attack from a hidden PC, yet it benefits from a higher initiative roll while surprised, it's obviously perceiving something via the initiative check (unless, perhaps, the DM constantly narrates it as fate or dumb luck).

If you are making your players make perception checks to identify that they are being shot with arrows then you a lot more problems in your game than I realized. If you don't like the assassinate ability, then houserule the ability itself. Don't destroy the way surprise, initiative, and rounds work. You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater and causing complications with other class abilities. How about gaining advantage on initiative if you surprise your opponent instead of the auto-crit?

I never claimed it had to be done the way I had suggested earlier in this thread (Take 20), or how frequently I'd apply a change. Nor do I recall any desire to gut the Rounds from combat.

Your method might not be the way I'd do it, but don't look now... you just adjudicated Initiative.

 

[abirdcall]

I'm interested how the surprise auto-crit is not a main ability. How do you come to this conclusion? It's in the same paragraph as the advantage on initiative ability, and it's under the heading 'assassinate' for a sub-class called 'assassin.' I follow your argument on initiative and surprise (don't agree, but I easily follow) and that makes sense, but I have zero idea where you're coming from in labelling the auto-crit as a sub-tier ability and relatively unimportant. Having read the rules just now, I'm really struggling to come up with any way you can make that argument that isn't entirely subject and, like, just your opinion, man (h/t the Dude). It's certainly not labeled 'this is the main part of the ability and this is the not main part of the ability.'

And it is three checks. It's whatever opposed check is needed to establish surprise (generally stealth, but deception, perform, whatever could apply), then it's the initiative check, then it's the attack role. It's gated behind three checks, which could use different abilities (CHA to deceive, DEX for initiative, and STR for attack roll). Granted, if you ignore initiative, it's still gated behind two checks, but I find that more tolerable, especially since one of them isn't quite as arbitrary and narrative impacting as initiative.

I think you have a strong argument re: initiative and surprise. Stick to that. Don't ignore rolls or invent a ranking for the two abilities in assassinate. You're not on strong ground there.

What happens if the assassin fails to surprise their opponent but wins initiative?

Do they get to use their assassinate power?

1 check - Initiative.

Both parts of the assassinate ability require you to win initiative. The latter one occurs in an event when the former one would be redundant. You don't see that?

You ranked them. You said to use their primary archetype ability they need to win 3 checks. They don't, they only need to win initiative. Getting advantage on their attack is their primary archetype ability. People are ignoring it to argue that they are weaker in order to say that it is ridiculous that they only get to use their power when they surprise and win initiative.

And seriously, you still aren't agreeing about needing to win initiative? It's in the rules, in the sage advice, and Jeremy Crawford has tweeted about it multiple times explaining it to people.

I don't know what else to say.

 

[Noctem]

[MENTION=6748898]ad_hoc[/MENTION]

So although you've been very aggressive towards other posters and so on. You haven't explained what you meant by saying that my houserule nerfs classes and such. Are you ever going to explain or are you just happy making these aggressive statements without feeling the need to actually address them?

 

[Ovinomancer]

What happens if the assassin fails to surprise their opponent but wins initiative?

He gets advantage until the target acts.

Do they get to use their assassinate power?

Yes, the part where they get advantage if they go before the target can act. No, they don't get to autocrit.

Did you think those questions were tricky, or something? I'm not understanding what you think my position is, because those would be clearly answerable if you did.

1 check - Initiative.

Ah, so you think that if the assassin wins initiative, he can autocrit when he autohits? Because I was under the impression that you thought that the conditions for surprise had to be met (usually a skill contest, but could be waived with DM fiat), then initiative must be rolled and won, and then the assassin had to hit his target successfully with a weapon attack before he got the benefit of the autocrit. Did you have a different sequence in mind? If so, what does the assassin have to do to get to the point where he autocrits?

Both parts of the assassinate ability require you to win initiative. The latter one occurs in an event when the former one would be redundant. You don't see that?

No, because it doesn't say that. It says that "any hit you score against a creature that is surprised is a critical hit." I suppose you could read that as also requiring that you beat their initiative, but you can also read it as just 'hitting a surprised creature -- however that occurs -- is a critical hit.

You ranked them. You said to use their primary archetype ability they need to win 3 checks. They don't, they only need to win initiative. Getting advantage on their attack is their primary archetype ability. People are ignoring it to argue that they are weaker in order to say that it is ridiculous that they only get to use their power when they surprise and win initiative.

I didn't rank them. Autocriting on surprise is part of the primary archetype ability. To use it, they need to win three checks.

Oh, wait. Are you saying that since the first part of the assassinate ability says something about initiative, that means that everything in the ability keys on initiative? Yeah, I don't get that at all.

And seriously, you still aren't agreeing about needing to win initiative? It's in the rules, in the sage advice, and Jeremy Crawford has tweeted about it multiple times explaining it to people.

Because the autocrit part doesn't say anything about initiative. It speaks only about surprise.

I don't know what else to say.

I don't know that you can say anything else. I've already agreed you have a strong position. I just disagree with it because I don't think it's fair to the assassin archetype for the reasons I've stated, and it isn't my bag anymore to run with blind RAW, "must follow the directives of the developer overlords to the detriment of my game," rulings anymore. Stretching surprise to last until the surprised creature takes an action doesn't break anything else, and allows assassinate to work more reliably for assassins. Given it's not a very strong ability, nor is it particularly powerful, that's an excellent solution that solves my issues with an initiative check acting as a second-chance perception check (or intuition check, or whatever). I see that you can make an good argument that that's how the rules work, but I don't like that outcome, so I can change it. The only place you'd ever notice that I had changed it would be if you were playing an assassin, so I find that a good solution because that's why I changed it.

So don't misunderstand my responses to you as attempting to change your mind or argue that I'm right. They're merely me explaining that I see your point, don't like it, and have decided to do something else.

 

[SkidAce]

...Stretching surprise to last until the surprised creature takes an action doesn't break anything else, and allows assassinate to work more reliably for assassins. Given it's not a very strong ability, nor is it particularly powerful, that's an excellent solution that solves my issues with an initiative check acting as a second-chance perception check (or intuition check, or whatever).

Been following the thread, lurking...SURPRISE! (/sorry)

In the case of your rule, how do you feel about the fact (if I am following you correctly) that every creature that is surprised will be autocrited (granted if hit roll is successfull)?

In other words, doesn't it swing things to the opposite end of the spectrum, and work too reliably?

 

[Ovinomancer]

Been following the thread, lurking...SURPRISE! (/sorry)

In the case of your rule, how do you feel about the fact (if I am following you correctly) that every creature that is surprised will be autocrited (granted if hit roll is successfull)?

In other words, doesn't it swing things to the opposite end of the spectrum, and work too reliably?

I feel that's perfect. If the assassin managed to pull off surprise, then he should get his benefit. I don't like that, after the work done to achieve surprise, which will still be uncommon, that the assassin then has to hope and pray he doesn't roll a 1 on initiative so that he can fully use his signature class ability. I'm not overly worried that the assassin has the opportunity to pull off an autocrit with some reliability. After all, a paladin waiting to smite after she rolls a crit will do as much damage, and her circumstances happen more often.

 

[Flamestrike]

until someone finds me a rule that says rolling intiative makes you immune to surprise I refuse to play or run it that way...

example: round 3 of a fight between the 3 ogers (well 2 now one died last round) the 4 PCs are surprised by the assassin who attacks from invisibility... Surprise=assassinate. Now you can argue 'well make a stealth check' or not, but if he is unseen and no one knows he is there...it is surprise.

No, thats hidden. There are rules for a hidden creature launching an attack in th PHB that cover this exact situation (unseen attackers).

Surprise only happens when you are unaware of all enemies and are caught completely unaware. If you notice just one enemy, you are not surprised. The unseen enemies can still attack you with advantage, and (obvioiusly) you cant attak them as you dont know theyre there.

Your PC's in the above example cant be surprised. Theyre already in combat and alert to danger.

Surprise models getting caught with your pants down, not simply being attacked by a creature you cant see or that is hidden from you. They model different things (that often occur simulatenously, but not always).